UNDERSTANDING SELF-OTHER AGREEMENT: A LOOK AT RATER AND RATEE CHARACTERISTICS, CONTEXT, AND OUTCOMES

This study investigated (a) the relative importance of a number of biographic (e.g., age, race, gender) and contextual (e.g., span of control, functional area) variables and their interactions on self-other agreement and (b) the relationship between self-other agreement and outcome variables such as performance and compensation. Usable data were collected from 3,217 managers and their multi-source raters in 527 organizations. Multivariate regression procedures (as opposed to categorization procedures) were used to determine the sources of rating disagreement. Results indicated that a significant portion of variance in self-other ratings was accounted for by the set of background/context variables. Self-other agreement was also related to performance, compensation, and organizational level, though rating patterns differed.     

THE INFLUENCE OF UPWARD FEEDBACK ON SELF- AND FOLLOWER RATINGS OF LEADERSHIP

The impact of upward feedback (followers' perceptions of leadership provided to leaders) on leaders' self-evaluations and followers' subsequent ratings of leadership was assessed in a field setting. Subjects were 978 student leaders and their 1,232 followers. Results indicated that overall, leaders' behaviors as rated by followers improved after feedback. Leaders' self-evaluations following feedback became more similar to the evaluations provided by followers. Interestingly, when leaders were grouped according to whether feedback was positive, neutral, or negative based on agreement between self- and follower ratings, differences between groups in post-feedback self-evaluations and follower ratings emerged. Self-evaluations for leaders receiving negative feedback (high self- relative to followers' ratings) went down, while self-evaluations for leaders receiving positive feedback (low self- relative to follower's ratings) went up. Follower ratings of leaders who received negative feedback improved following feedback to leaders, while there was no change in follower ratings for those receiving positive feedback. Implications for using upward feedback in organizations are discussed.     

SELF-OTHER AGREEMENT: DOES IT REALLY MATTER?

A current controversy in the self-other rating and 360-degree feedback literature is the extent to which self-other agreement (and lack of agreement) has an impact on individual and organizational outcomes. Using a large sample and a multi-source data set, the current study addressed some methodological limitations of prior research. Results from polynomial regression analyses demonstrated that both self- and other ratings are related to performance outcomes. This procedure revealed the underlying three-dimensional relationship between self-ratings, other ratings, and effectiveness. Findings indicate that the relationship between self-ratings, other ratings and outcomes are somewhat more complex than previous conceptualizations in this area. Simultaneous consideration of both self- and other ratings in terms of the direction and magnitude of self- and other ratings is important for explaining effectiveness outcomes.     

AN UPWARD FEEDBACK FIELD EXPERIMENT: SUPERVISORS' CYNICISM, REACTIONS, AND COMMITMENT TO SUBORDINATES

A field experiment was conducted to examine outcomes associated with an upward feedback program in a policing agency. Experimental groups included 110 supervisors who were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 conditions: (a) a feedback group in which supervisors and subordinates completed surveys and received feedback at two time periods, or (b) a survey-only group in which supervisors and subordinates completed surveys at Times 1 and 2, but supervisors received feedback only at Time 2. Results showed no significant improvement for the feedback or survey-only group with regard to subordinate ratings of leadership. However, a significant decrease in self-rated leadership scores occurred between Time 1 and Time 2 for the supervisors receiving feedback at Time 1, and no such changes were observed for supervisors who were only surveyed at Time 1. In addition, Time 1 to Time 2 leadership change was predicted by organizational cynicism and the extent to which the recipient reacts positively to upward feedback and takes steps to improve. Thus, individual attitudes appear to be relevant to behavior change following upward feedback. In addition, leadership measured at Time 1 predicted supervisors' commitment to their subordinates at Time 2 for the feedback group, but not for the survey-only group. Such results demonstrate that outcomes in addition to performance, such as commitment to subordinates, need to be considered in the implementation of upward feedback programs.